To think a 66% turnout is just not enough

[odyssey2001]

It just annoys me that only two thirds of the population care about how the country is run.

AIBU to think that if you do not vote you cannot whine and moan about the economy, benefits, immigration, the NHS, pensions, potholes, the education system, tuition fees, any political party especially UKIP or austerity measures.

If you don't vote, you don't get a say.

YABU.
People surely have the right to not vote?

People surely have the right to not vote?

Yes they do, but they should still be made to actually physically tick a box on a ballot form saying 'None of the above'.

UK population = 64 million
Electorate = 47 million
Votes cast = 31 million

I think?

This is actually the highest turnout since 1997.

However there is definitely an overall downward trend since the 1950s.

Not sure if compulsory voting is the answer but I definitely support electoral reform.

Well we're moving back to the UK next year, so it definitely impacts me!

Many expats who are away from the UK temporarily will still have property in the UK, and may still be making NI contributions or paying in to UK based pension funds.

Plus we can't vote where we live either. It's a bit shit to pay taxes and have no democratic rights.

not all of the 44% was down to apathy (or Russell Brand)

Where is this 44% coming from? It's 34% that didn't vote. (100-66=34)

I can't see any good reason for introducing compulsory voting. All you would get is added cost and utter nightmare bureaucracy of policing it and loads of people voting because they have to but with no clue what they're doing or why.

What on earth good would it actually do anyone?

Oh god sorry! It's morning here and I haven't had any coffee yet

itsonly - 66% turnout means that 66% of the people on the electoral register voted.

So not two thirds of the actual population, because as you pointed out, not everyone in the UK is an eligible voter.

I was Poll Clerk yesterday and we worked out (roughly) that turnout for our little polling station was around 80%.

It's a shame more people don't use their vote - we had a few first time voters yesterday and they all said how excited they were to do it, which I thought was great, I wished I could have handed out little stickers or something to mark the occasion!

Politics has been soured by politicians, and the media frenzy and endless droning on about it add to the sense of alienation from the political process. I'm not active in politics and never would want to be but have voted on every occasion I'm eligible for (even the police commissioner vote) because I'm of the possibly old fashioned sort that thinks it's a privilege.

I've no idea what the answer is, I'm not sure that compulsory voting wouldn't annoy people even more, but it would help if the politicians would take a long hard look at how they conduct themselves and the press perhaps could the same.

I'm also in favour of compulsory voting and a modest fine for not doing so (with exemptions), and an option for 'none of the above' or similar.

A party ruling with a 35% vote is just wrong, imo.

It's quite ironic when Governments criticise unions for striking and say they need at least 50% of the total membership to vote yes when Governments claim they have a mandate to govern on 36% of a 70% turnout.

Agree with frostyfingers politicians (particularly English, Welsh and Northern Irish) need to engage the public better. Some Scottish constituencies had an 80% turnout, which really impressed me. I appreciate that a lot of Scots would have felt very strongly that they want their voices to be heard, but let's get that passion in the rest of the UK.

UKIP get 13% of the votes and get 1 seat. SNP get 4.3% and get 56 seats.

I didn't vote for UKIP but something doesn't sound right - or is it just me!

When
the SNP gets 56 seats from 1,454,436 votes
the DUP gets 8 seats from 184,260
but the Lib Ddms get the same number of seats from 2,415,888 votes
and the Greens get 1 seat from 1,157,613

and the people of Buckingham are denied a choice because their MP is the speaker

its the SYSTEM that needs changing, not how pissed off we feel.

Is a person in Ulster really worth 13 in England?

The Scots already get subsidised through the Barnett Formula
Should they really be worth 12 Lib Dem voters in England?

talkinpeace

Not just that - but the reality is the Government is determined by a few key marginals.

There are seats that have never changed hands.

Talkin - absolutely fascinating - thank you.

orlando and hattie
I also vote in the USA. Have a look at the damage that Gerrymandering of FPTP systems have done there.
The district I vote in looks like a Jackson Pollock painting.
It is so utterly rigged I often wonder why I bother.

When I was growing up PR was discredited by the debacle of Italy.
But it works now (eg) Germany.
If Labour have any principles at all they should spend the next 5 years fighting hard for it as its the only hope we have of more balanced governments in future.

Agree that proportional representation seems like a much fairer system than first past the post.

There should be compulsory voting.

Jackie
Why should there be compulsory voting in a FPTP system?
Why should the people of Buckingham be forced to vote when they have no choice?

Did the polling stations in Buckingham open at all?

Seems a waste of time to bother at all if the speaker's guaranteed to get in anyway.

Speaker not guaranteed to get in - maion parties do not put up candidates, but fringe parties do

My dh didn't vote, he was unwell, had been in bed the past couple of days. He could have dragged himself down there, but we live in a safe labour seat anyway so he didn't bother.

Also meant to say, yes on the whole 66% is a shockingly low turnout.